Mike Kucaba Posted May 30, 2015 Posted May 30, 2015 I have learned that you can please some of the people some of the time... but not all of the people all of the time.
Harry P. Posted May 30, 2015 Posted May 30, 2015 It's easier and cheaper to print instructions with just numbers rather than calling out all the parts in English, French, Spanish, German, Japanese, Italian, etc...
Greg Myers Posted May 30, 2015 Author Posted May 30, 2015 On 5/28/2015 at 9:35 PM, Howard Cohen said: In order to have the names of the parts, the instructions would have to be in several languages...caused mostly by people who speak other languages In the U.S., most of your packaging is English and Spanish. In Canada it is English and French. In Europe it is English, French, German, Spanish and Italian. In the Orient, it is various Asian languages. Maybe the kit manufacturers could add the names to their websites and we could print off the names in our favourite language So where did you hear that Harry ?
FordRodnKustom Posted May 30, 2015 Posted May 30, 2015 (edited) How the hottest race cars of the time were designed and constructed IMC took this it to a new level Head spinning stuff for a car obsessed youngster Edited May 30, 2015 by FordRodnKustom
Ace-Garageguy Posted May 30, 2015 Posted May 30, 2015 Those two old IMC instruction sheets reminded me that I got my first insight into the concept of monocoque structures from them, and a fascination with them that would eventually lead me into aviation structural repair as part of my career.
Art Anderson Posted May 30, 2015 Posted May 30, 2015 On 5/30/2015 at 1:39 PM, Harry P. said: It's easier and cheaper to print instructions with just numbers rather than calling out all the parts in English, French, Spanish, German, Japanese, Italian, etc... How so? Extra text on an instruction sheet uses only a very minute fraction of a penny in ink! Frankly, the idea of eliminating parts descriptions was a fad by the late 1960's--illustrations rather than text seemed to be the thing, not just for kids and model kits, but with just about anything requiring assembly. In other words, the then popular "Wordless Workshop" idea. Art
Harry P. Posted May 30, 2015 Posted May 30, 2015 On 5/30/2015 at 8:34 PM, Art Anderson said: How so? Extra text on an instruction sheet uses only a very minute fraction of a penny in ink! Frankly, the idea of eliminating parts descriptions was a fad by the late 1960's--illustrations rather than text seemed to be the thing, not just for kids and model kits, but with just about anything requiring assembly. In other words, the then popular "Wordless Workshop" idea. Art It's not the amount of ink, it's the size of the sheet. In order to fit the names of the parts in six-seven-eight or more languages, you'd need a larger instruction sheet. Bigger sheet... higher costs. Maybe not $$$, but certainly more cost. And every penny counts, right?
Greg Myers Posted May 30, 2015 Author Posted May 30, 2015 Looking at post # 1 and # 2 I don't see it. and post # 2 , the older instruction sheet actually has a multi lingual presentation of sorts both on one page. I think they can fit just about what they want on a page and space has no bounds.
Mike_G Posted May 30, 2015 Posted May 30, 2015 I got a kick out of an old Fujimi instruction sheet that said "be careful of the two sides, light and left".
Sixties Sam Posted May 31, 2015 Posted May 31, 2015 On 5/28/2015 at 7:17 PM, cobraman said: Ya, I liked when the part names were called out. That was how I learned what some parts were called in my early building days. Ditto for me. Most of what I know about cars came from building models. Sam
Ace-Garageguy Posted May 31, 2015 Posted May 31, 2015 On 5/30/2015 at 11:22 PM, Mike_G said: I got a kick out of an old Fujimi instruction sheet that said "be careful of the two sides, light and left". Shouldn't that be "light and reft"?.
Sixties Sam Posted May 31, 2015 Posted May 31, 2015 I've built many R/C planes, and the plans usually show just one fuselage side, and have a note telling you to be sure and build a right and a left side. It's easy to build two lefts or two rights by mistake. Guess how I know that! Sam
Tom Geiger Posted June 1, 2015 Posted June 1, 2015 On 5/30/2015 at 8:34 PM, Art Anderson said: How so? Extra text on an instruction sheet uses only a very minute fraction of a penny in ink! It's not the ink nor the number of pages.... it's the cost of buying the translation services in multiple languages. I'm currently involved in sending out company wide announcements in eight languages. There are companies that do this work, and it's very expensive!
Rob Hall Posted June 1, 2015 Posted June 1, 2015 I learned a lot about cars and parts of cars from modeling...and some fascinating facts like how some cars had metal axles that went through the engine block..
Ace-Garageguy Posted June 1, 2015 Posted June 1, 2015 On 6/1/2015 at 12:39 AM, Tom Geiger said: It's not the ink nor the number of pages.... it's the cost of buying the translation services in multiple languages. I'm currently involved in sending out company wide announcements in eight languages. There are companies that do this work, and it's very expensive! Who are you using? I've had occasion to need technical documents translated from German, Italian Japanese and Chinese. I've usually paid about $50 for a full page of text (when no specialized technical knowledge was required of the translator) to around $75-$100 for a page of highly technical material. Once you get the translations, you just run off copies as-necessary and bind in-house, using salaried office employees. Not expensive at all...in my own experience, anyway. Seems like the translation costs for model car instructions, with relatively common words and not very many of them on a page, ought to be an insignificant expense.
Ace-Garageguy Posted June 1, 2015 Posted June 1, 2015 On 6/1/2015 at 12:51 AM, Rob Hall said: I learned a lot about cars and parts of cars from modeling...and some fascinating facts like how some cars had metal axles that went through the engine block.. Gotta admit, when I was a kid, it took me a while to figure out that wasn't quite, shall we say, "prototypically correct".
Jantrix Posted June 1, 2015 Posted June 1, 2015 Because of models- For someone born in '68 and raised during the stylistally stagnant 70's and 80's (with exceptions), I know an awful lot about old cars, because I've been building them, talking about them, researching them for my entire adult life. My father was born in '44 and grew up wrenching with his dad in the mid-to-late 50's and early 60's and is a great source of vintage automotive knowledge, but I seem to impress him pretty frequently when we're at a car show together or whenever he's checking out my latest models. Which I gotta say, is a pretty great feeling. I owe a lot of this knowledge to you guys, who help out and inform whenever possible. Much appreciated.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now